Author Topic: Syria  (Read 6869 times)

Offline SnowBeast

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Syria
« on: September 04, 2013, 10:25:24 AM »
Yeah or neah on the military action?  Not sure but I'm leaning towards go & drop 'em on the runways to curb air warfare against the people....but who are these people that are fighting their gov and why?  Are they jihads, as corrupt as the gov, or not?  Its good to know barrack is at least seeking congressional support first.....this way the left can justify any action .  Of course they did not use this defense against Bush who had vast congress majority behind the Iraq war.  :nono:

Offline tony b

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16962
  • Karma: +4/-132
  • These go to Eleven!!
    • View Profile
Re: Syria
« Reply #1 on: September 04, 2013, 10:46:30 AM »
feck 'em right in the arse, let the whole Middle East burn, they are neanderthals and I'm sick of spending time/money/american lives to "fix" a problem that will never go away.
You hate your job??  why didn't you say so?? well, there's a support group for that, it's called EVERYBODY and they meet at the bar.

Offline ZiRT

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3939
  • Karma: +3/-29
    • View Profile
Re: Syria
« Reply #2 on: September 04, 2013, 11:23:57 AM »
I'm in agreement with Tony on this one. We've made more enemies than friends trying to help the world, time to pull back and let them take care of their own business.

Offline Kingpin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10111
  • Karma: +22/-111
    • View Profile
Re: Syria
« Reply #3 on: September 04, 2013, 01:08:11 PM »
Yeah or neah on the military action?  Not sure but I'm leaning towards go & drop 'em on the runways to curb air warfare against the people....but who are these people that are fighting their gov and why?  Are they jihads, as corrupt as the gov, or not?  Its good to know barrack is at least seeking congressional support first.....this way the left can justify any action .  Of course they did not use this defense against Bush who had vast congress majority behind the Iraq war.  :nono:

The POTUS is trying to force congress to take a stand and hold them responsible, which really is not the case.  Congress does not command the millitary and does not conduct foreign policy, by design.  It's a political ploy.  The congress will authorize limited strikes and most likely POTUS will lob some Tomahawk's over at them.  That's all I can see for now, it will be targeted to not make the regime fall and to minimize collateral damage.  In essence it will do very little except allow POTUS to save some face. 

The best action would have been to get some allies on the bandwagon before having an acute case of verbal diarrhea then build the case for action.  He had 2 years from when he said that the Assad regime needed to go.. 
« Last Edit: September 04, 2013, 01:42:39 PM by Kingpin »
"Dessert is for people who don't drink enough."
"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money. "

Offline SnowBeast

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Syria
« Reply #4 on: September 04, 2013, 04:30:05 PM »
Tony and Zirt....what about those children getting gassed and killed?   Seems cold the UN has not banned together to get them some help.  WTF?

Offline Kingpin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10111
  • Karma: +22/-111
    • View Profile
Re: Syria
« Reply #5 on: September 04, 2013, 05:55:51 PM »
Will a targeted strike keep more kids from dying?  That is the operative question..
"Dessert is for people who don't drink enough."
"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money. "

Offline tony b

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16962
  • Karma: +4/-132
  • These go to Eleven!!
    • View Profile
Re: Syria
« Reply #6 on: September 05, 2013, 07:53:38 AM »
Tony and Zirt....what about those children getting gassed and killed?   Seems cold the UN has not banned together to get them some help.  WTF?
they've been killing each other for 3000yrs, you think WE (the USA) should go over there and kill some more of them, which will inevitably kill innocents as well, so they'll stop killing each other??  seriously, do ya think that will accomplish anything other than giving both sides of that civil war a united hatred of the USA and cause, by direct and indirect action, the loss of more american lives??  let the whole fecking place burn and we'll sit back and wait for it to implode and send in humanitarian efforts to pick up the pieces.  we've done too much bombing over there already and it hasn't exactly ended well for us.
You hate your job??  why didn't you say so?? well, there's a support group for that, it's called EVERYBODY and they meet at the bar.

Offline ZiRT

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3939
  • Karma: +3/-29
    • View Profile
Re: Syria
« Reply #7 on: September 05, 2013, 11:16:51 AM »
Tony and Zirt....what about those children getting gassed and killed?   Seems cold the UN has not banned together to get them some help.  WTF?
You mean the same kids they strap bombs to and send into our military camps to blow our guys up?
The main problem I have is we've put ourselves into a position where we're screwed either way. 1) We go in and blow everything to hell, there's a regime change, and they, along with the rest of the middle east, turn against us because we're too meddlesome in their affairs. b) We don't go in and everybody, including the rest of the middle east, says we didn't help the innocents.
I say, stay out of it, let their neighbors in Iran, Iraq, etc. help them instead of relying on us to do the work then hate us for it.

Offline 6Mile

  • Waconia, MN
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4319
  • Karma: +21/-45
    • View Profile
Re: Syria
« Reply #8 on: September 05, 2013, 11:29:13 AM »
It is time the US become more of an isolationist nation again.  We are not the world police and our arrogance in thinking we are, has made the United States quite unpopular and quite frankly has put a target on our back.

Personally I think we should sit this one out, time to listen to our elders in the UK.  They want no part of this as well.

As for the POTUS, he should learn to keep his mouth shut and also put Kerry on a vacation.  Putin is making these two look like children.

Where do we think we are going to get the money to do this?  In case anyone has not noticed, we are broke.  We borrow more than we generate. 
« Last Edit: September 05, 2013, 11:37:19 AM by 6Mile »
Work harder, millions on welfare depend on you...

Sleds:
2013 Polaris Switchback Assault 144 800
2007 Polaris Switchback 600 Wife's sled
1997 Arctic Cat Puma DLX 340 has more time on it last  season than the above sleds.

MNUSA

Offline tony b

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16962
  • Karma: +4/-132
  • These go to Eleven!!
    • View Profile
Re: Syria
« Reply #9 on: September 05, 2013, 12:42:51 PM »
It is time the US become more of an isolationist nation again.  We are not the world police and our arrogance in thinking we are, has made the United States quite unpopular and quite frankly has put a target on our back.
this

Quote
Personally I think we should sit this one out, time to listen to our elders in the UK.  They want no part of this as well.
and this
Quote
As for the POTUS, he should learn to keep his mouth shut and also put Kerry on a vacation.  Putin is making these two look like children.
freakin amateur night foreign policy
Quote
Where do we think we are going to get the money to do this?  In case anyone has not noticed, we are broke.  We borrow more than we generate.
and this.
You hate your job??  why didn't you say so?? well, there's a support group for that, it's called EVERYBODY and they meet at the bar.

Offline Kingpin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10111
  • Karma: +22/-111
    • View Profile
Re: Syria
« Reply #10 on: September 05, 2013, 01:16:31 PM »
It is time the US become more of an isolationist nation again.  We are not the world police and our arrogance in thinking we are, has made the United States quite unpopular and quite frankly has put a target on our back.

Personally I think we should sit this one out, time to listen to our elders in the UK.  They want no part of this as well.

As for the POTUS, he should learn to keep his mouth shut and also put Kerry on a vacation.  Putin is making these two look like children.

Where do we think we are going to get the money to do this?  In case anyone has not noticed, we are broke.  We borrow more than we generate.
Well, my personal opinion is the congress should authorize missile strike only and very limited in scope and target, no free hand to conduct this operation.  Then POTUS and Kerry should shut up.  Kerry had the balls and audacity to suggest that the Arabs wanting to pay for a full war was a good thing.  What a twerp and what a mental midget and coward.  War is not to be decided by who is picking up the tab, are we just mercenaries now, is this guy f'ng for real?  We truly put a price tag on US citizens dying so Arabs can pay for it?  McCain is wrong, Kerry, Obama, etc. = WRONG.  I have no problem lighting another country up, but damn these guys are idiots. 
"Dessert is for people who don't drink enough."
"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money. "

Offline SnowBeast

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Syria
« Reply #11 on: September 06, 2013, 08:37:59 AM »
All nations have agreed to not use WMD, Poison GAS.  Is this not reason enough to get in there and at least stomp those acts?

I think so.  If they were just bombing and shooting as usual, then let them continue as they have what seems like forever.
I'm thnking some of IRAQ wmd from 10 yrs ago made its way into Syria.  Let it fester and see how long it takes for the winds to blow that gas or other WMD our way?  I'm thinking we need to be more pro-active.

Offline Kingpin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10111
  • Karma: +22/-111
    • View Profile
Re: Syria
« Reply #12 on: September 06, 2013, 11:35:24 AM »
My very long-winded response.. :ranting:
so, what is the mission and goals?  It's not just hey let's keep them from using gas..  You need to play geo-political chess, not checkers or Assassin's Creed 4.  I agree that using chemical weapons should be dealt with harshly, however, that is a moral argument, of course 99% of US people most likely abhor the violence going on there. However, what change can we effect and at what cost to us?  When I mean cost I don't mean $, I mean total cost down the road and the unintended consequences.  I believe the Syrian regime wants us to get in to the mix, occupiers are always the enemy, ask Afghanistan..

That's the problem, I think the POTUS needs to define the mission and it seems pretty damn murky right now.
-- do we want regime change (Obama said Assad needed to go 2 years ago) -- US State department has that as official position, if we topple the regime we own that mess now in the world's view.
-- do we want to punish them for using chem weps?  -- DoD has that as official position
-- do we want to de-stabilize the regime and allow the rebel groups to win civil war?
-- do we want to install a new regime that is friendly to us at this point in time?
-- do we want to degrade the ability of the regime to use chem weps in the future?
-- do we want to serve up Syria as an example or deterrent to using chemical weapons? 
-- Are we (the US) prepared to deal with blow back from attacking a regime known to harbor terrorists and support them?  -- IE we should expect attacks on our citizens if not our soil
-- Are we prepared for the bad PR of our missiles taking out women and children?
-- Do we have any other nation willing to act (NOT FINANCE) with us? 
-- Are we prepared to put boots on the ground in a significant number?  -- The army estimates it could take more than 50k troops to secure all of the chemical weapons -- this might be a little high, but I bet it's not too far off the mark when you look at what it takes to support combat troops in the field, especially in hostile territory.
-- Are we prepared to go against Russia and Iran?  They both support the Syrian regime, so, you gotta figure that math out. 

Have we exhausted ALL diplomatic means to bring some of these questions to a resolution?
--  I mean to say, your looking to kill people, you better be damned sure your ready to deal with the consequences of killing innocent people.  We hold our soldiers and leaders to a much higher standard than most other countries, especially in that area of the world.  If things go bad and we have boots on the ground, are we prepared to deal with our boys and girls dying execution style and getting strung up on display??  Are we prepared to have our guys off some innocent Syrians, it happens, you put young guys in super high stress situations and bad things happen, look at all the fragging and extra-judical killings that have happened in Iraq and Afghanistan with our troops.


All of those different questions will define different mission parameters.  Until they answer some of those questions, it's kind of hard to get specific and the devil is in these details.  The military needs very clear direction not grey areas like nation building and regime change as stated goals.  Think of an Operations Order for the Army as an example:

Situation -- Provides information essential to subordinate leader's understanding of the situation. -- weather, enemy forces, intelligence, activities, etc
Mission  -- This is a clear, concise statement of the unit's task(s) to be accomplished and the purpose for doing it (who, what, when, where, why, and how).
Execution -- detailed definition of the how the unit will accomplish it's mission.
Service and Support -- Logistics, beans, bullets, and billits, medical, fuel, etc, etc.
Command and Signal -- command and control elements
"Dessert is for people who don't drink enough."
"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money. "

Offline Kingpin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10111
  • Karma: +22/-111
    • View Profile
Re: Syria
« Reply #13 on: September 06, 2013, 11:51:31 AM »
All nations have agreed to not use WMD, Poison GAS.  Is this not reason enough to get in there and at least stomp those acts?

I think so.  If they were just bombing and shooting as usual, then let them continue as they have what seems like forever.
I'm thnking some of IRAQ wmd from 10 yrs ago made its way into Syria.  Let it fester and see how long it takes for the winds to blow that gas or other WMD our way?  I'm thinking we need to be more pro-active.

Answer to your question is NO.  Just because they used it, that does not give the US automatic clear justification to act.  The use of sarin gas in Syria does not represent a clear and imminent danger to the US homeland or US citizens.  If it did, I would absolutely be 100% behind attacking them with more than just cruise missiles.

There is an International War Crimes Tribunal and other organizations set up specifically to deal with that war crime.  IMO, your asking 1 question, but we need to ask questions 7 steps down from the answer to that question. 

The Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive strikes got us into this situation.  After 9/11 we were looking at the world in a very different lens than we see the world today.  So, the doctrine of pre-emption might not be applicable now. 

"Dessert is for people who don't drink enough."
"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money. "

Offline Kingpin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10111
  • Karma: +22/-111
    • View Profile
"Dessert is for people who don't drink enough."
"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money. "